2x580 vs 590

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
X

xtreme5

Distinguished
Dec 7, 2011
3,278
1
21,160
the 2 gtx 580 can beat single gtx 590 easily because i'm currently using sli gtx 580 with 2500k and performing outstanding without any issue's and now i'm going to upgrade crossfire HD 7970.

get 2 gtx 580.
 
Rockdpm

Rockdpm

Splendid
Dec 26, 2011
4,439
0
23,160
Wait xtreme, your telling him 2 GTX 580's beat a 590 because you are using a 2 GTX 580's.

Now to answer the question. there are basically both the same. But the 590 is a cheaper card to snag than getting two GTX 580s. I think you should get the 590. Its plenty of power for the next year to come. I havn't used either of the setups. I use two individual GTX 560 ti's in SLI. it beats 1 580 from what i have seen. but however comparing to the GTX 590, its only about 75% close to a 590. the 590 is a better priced option to get the closest thing to 2x GTX 580's
 
M

Mister Gray

Distinguished
Nov 12, 2011
23
0
18,510


The 590 is two de-powered 570's

Idk where the article is but if I'm not mistaken you can find where Nvidia actually states this.

I had the cash to get a 590....I was dead set on it too. More I read and weighed everything out I went with 3GB 580 by EVGA. The duall processor would be pretty nice to have for scaling and yeah two 590's would be pretty sweet but think about this

1)BF3 is if I'm not mistaken the most graphics intensive game. SLI is the only way to TRULY max it out (EVERY setting maxed) and 590 does a good job but my 580 makes it look pretty amazing as is and I saved about $200 (4xmsaa only thing not maxed). Yeah you'll pay less for one 590 but it doesn't blow the 580 completely out of the water on its own. Does it justify that much of an increase? IMAO hell no

2) How much longer before that card begins to depreciate? Radeon just released the newest batch of their series and Nvidia isn't far behind I dont imagine. A 590 is going to hold its place even after the newest series but a 580 is too and SLI two of them and I doubt you could be dissatisfied by that.

Justify the cost is my advice.....Is it REALLY that much better......If someone has had both I'd love to hear an opinion but that's my 2 cents
 
JackNaylorPE

JackNaylorPE

Titan
BANNED
Oct 30, 2004
32,255
14
99,960
Based upon Guru3D's game test suite.....(COD-MW, Bad Company 2, Dirt 2, Far Cry 2, Metro 2033, Dawn of Discovery, Crysis Warhead.).


Two 900 Mhz 560 Ti's @ $410 will get ya 862 fps at a cost of $ 0.48 per frame

Two 570's @ $680 will get ya 873 fps at a cost of $ 0.78 per frame

Two 580's @ $1,000 will get ya 953 fps at a cost of $ 1.05 per frame

One 590 @ $750 will get ya 881 fps at a cost of $ 0.85 per frame

The 590 gets ya 19 more fps than the twin 900 Mhz 560 Ti's for an extra investment of $340.

The 560 Ti's are factory overclocked by 10% .... they can be further OC'd to 25 - 30% over the reference speed .... 1070 is highest I have seen, I usually do 1020 (25%)

http://www.pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=1201&page=17

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&N=100006519&isNodeId=1&Description=900Mhz+560+Ti&x=0&y=0

Twin 580's get ya 8% more performance than the 590 but, it costs ya $250 more

Twin 580's get ya 10% more performance than the twin 560's but, it costs ya $590 more

A 7970 gets ya 78% of the performance of the twin 560's and it costs ya $140 more

Can't give ya numbers on 7970's in CF as there were issues with 4 of the games in the test suite. This should be resolved as soon as drivers get tweaked to handle these issues.
 
jonpaul37

jonpaul37

Distinguished
May 29, 2008
2,481
0
19,960


Should be "Dr. JackNaylorPE" if you ask me. Good stuff.

Now, id' REALLY love to see those same exact comparisons on an LGA 775 motherboard with a Q9650 at the helm and then a Core i7 920 as well to see the CPU difference...
 
maxinexus

maxinexus

Distinguished
Jan 1, 2007
1,101
1
19,360
You also have to look at the disadvantages of SLI or CF. More power, more heat, and more noise. If you can not wait get a best single solution card out there( not counting 590 or 6990 they are way too much noisy). So for now the best single card solution is 7970. If you are willing to wait for Kepler just wait and see.
 
A

AidanJC

Distinguished
Mar 22, 2011
231
0
18,690


A GTX580 is more than enough on Ultra at 1080P. I usually sit on about 50 FPS during intensive scenes. I think it was 50? I could be wrong though :p

Keep in mind, my 580 has roughly a 20% overclock applied to it.
 
JackNaylorPE

JackNaylorPE

Titan
BANNED
Oct 30, 2004
32,255
14
99,960
i think I'm gonna just start copy-pasting this response every time I see Jack's post until he starts being more honest in his numbers/methodology. You compare an overclocked setup to non-overclocked cards. Let's change that to be more honest, shall we?
Click to expand...

No, I included a comparison of two cards as tested "outta the box". What's dishonest ? .... the fact that the 560 Ti's are factory overclocked is clearly stated. The point is both cards are retail products untouched by user or reviewer's hands. As there was no data on factory overclocked 590's and factory overclocked 7970's I can't very well post that data, now can I ?????

In other words, using this methodology a 7970 OC gives you 95.5% of the performance of a 560ti SLI OC setup for 34% more money.
Click to expand...

I don't bother much with methodology's that involve benchmarks cause most users don't play benchmarks, so to be useful, I like to stay in the real world of playing games to judge game performance. Take out the synthetic benchies and your 95% takes a big nosedive.

But let's that be set that aside for a moment and takes all your postulations as fact..... In other words, your claim is that, again assuming all your statements to be correct (more on that later) I can get 95% of the performance with a 7970 and I get to pay and extra 34% for the pleasure of being 5 % slower !!!!!!

What's ya point ???? Using your own faulty data, why would I wanna pay an extra 34% to go slower ??????

Excuse me for not being impressed. Now let's gets to the faults in your claims.

Your reference is not an "out of the box" comparison, mine is. Your published reference states:

As you can see after trying and testing significantly, we simply could max out the slider. That's 1125 MHz on the core (925 = default)
Click to expand...

That's not a factory overclock,...that's a reviewer OC. Again, ya wanna talk reviewer OC, ya gotta add 20% to all the factory overclocked 560 Ti numbers. My numbers are at the 900 Mhz meager factory OC.....the card is capable of 1070 Mhz......ya wanna talk apples and apples, add 20% more to the 560 Ti's numbers.

http://www.pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=1201&page=17

So after claiming that I was dishonest for comparing exactly what I said I was comparing, you responded by comparing a meager factory overclock with full guaranteed performance with a reviewer's overclock who maxed out just one of the cards in the comparison and left the other at "factory settings". That's your definition of honest ??????

So yes, let's make you be as honest as I was..... I included published benchmarks of a factory overclocked 560 Ti card "outta the box" with a 7970 "outta the box"....exactly what I stated. You stated that the "calculated" OC's were arrived at by multiplying by the 10% factory OC .... yet you dishonestly didn't apply a factory overclock to the 7970's numbers, you used the "max overclock" that the reviewer could get. Why didn't you apply a reviewer's max overclock ?????

So let's look again at your numbers, corrected to use a reviewer's max OC for both cards:

Game - (7970 OC / 560TI SLI OC)
Modern Warfare 2 - (177 / 224) .... 200 x 1070 / 820 = 261 not 224 ... a 47% advantage
Far Cry 2 - (119 / 155) .... 141 x 1070 / 820 = 184 not 155 .... ... a 55% advantage
Anno 1404 - (143 / 125).... 115 x 1070 / 820 = 150 not 125 ... a 5% advantage
Metro 2033 - (49 / 47) ..... 47 x 1070 / 820 = 61 not 47 ... a 24% advantage
Battlefield: Bad Company 2 - (88 / 102) ..... 102 x 1070 / 820 = 133 not 102 ... a 51% advantage

Total 576 fps for the Reviewer Overclocked 7970 and 789 fps for the reviewer overclocked 560 Ti's. That's a 37% advantage to the 560 Ti's using my method.

Using your method since you stated mine is not representative ..... not exactly a big spread there .... Average % advantage = 36.4 % .... a difference of 0.6 % In conclusion, using your own methods, but using max reviewer OC's on both cards from the published sources provided, the 7970 is 73% as fast as the twin 560 Ti's.....and ya get the priviledge pay an extra $140 to go 73 % as fast.

Just to be clear, this is not an "nVidia versus AMD" thing..... it's a "buying the most powerful single GPU card versus two mid range cards thing." Twin 6870's "outta the box" get 701 fps in Guri3D game test suite and beat the 7970 "outta the box" by 26 fps....and they do it for $300 ..... $250 less than the 7970.....104 % of the performance for 54% of the price.
 
JackNaylorPE

JackNaylorPE

Titan
BANNED
Oct 30, 2004
32,255
14
99,960


I was in that camp until about 18 months ago..... now I just won't pay the single GPU premium....the vendors have realized how much peeps are willing to pay for bragging rights and they are stuck because they can't price the mid ranged cards any higher or lose the market. Noise and heat is a complete non issue with the factory OC'd cards big coolers, fan profiles and a decent case. Yes they use more power..... but not so much that ya gonna worry about the power bill

Using this:

http://extreme.outervision.com/PSUEngine

I'm showing 45 watts more power consumption for the twin 560's versus the 580.

45 watts x 24 hrs per week x 52 weeks per year x 3 years x 0.10 / kw-hr / 1000 watts per kw = $16.85

580 costs $500, twin 560's $410 ..... I'm ahead $73.15

nVidia states the TDP as being 244 watts for the 580 versus 170 x 2 = 340 for the 560 Ti's..... that's pushed up due to the 560's greater overclock ability.

But even using the 96 watts .... that's $35.94 over 3 years.... still way way less than the price premium ya pay buying the 580.....and that's also about 4 times the amount of gaming I can get in in any given week.
 
S

swifty_morgan

Illustrious
Feb 10, 2006
13,566
1
42,960
seeing how it's already March and new cards will be coming out relatively soon I wouldn't buy either one of those cards. From information on a few different spots on the web you should be able to get 580 performance for much less.

If I had to choose I would go for the 2 card performance. The 590 has been retarded in performance so it would run. Plain and simple.
 
jk47

jk47

Distinguished
Nov 2, 2011
118
0
18,680
GTX 590 user here.

Did a lot of research before making my purchase and I was also torn between the two options.



GTX 590 is two underclocked 580's.

On a price to performance ratio (determined from average benchmarks) the GTX 590 is superior. The big factor here, is that a 590 costs let's say $750, while 2 x 580's cost $1050.


You've got to draw the line somewhere with amount you'll pay. Otherwise we'd all be playing with SLI ASUS ROG MARS II
 
G

gxavier38

Honorable
Feb 22, 2012
249
0
10,690
Sorry to ask so much, just cant make up my mind... 2X 580 vs 7950, price per performance. Note: will use water cooling, so overclock will be beast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom